Step 1 in the Bush War Model: Leaks plans. Watch for reaction.

So Edwards is going to make people go to the doctor. Let’s see…liberal want to tell people what they can drive, what they can eat, and now when they have to see a doctor. I though liberals were pro-choice? That’s right that only applies to abortion.

Merk:
Pig said “liberals want to tell people….”
I was saying it’s the other way around……….

“Let’s see…liberal want to tell people what they can drive, what they can eat, and now when they have to see a doctor.”

Sounds like conservatives want to tell people who we’re going to war with EVEN THOUGH THE AMERICAN PUBLIC VOTED VEHEMENTLY AGAINST THE WAR.

What RS… are you going to censor me again?

Use your brains. Three countries in the axis of evil: Iraq, Iran, North Korea. Two threaten Israel: Iraq and Iran. Which do we choose to make peace with? North Korea. Again, I’m proven right.

Censor me again Rolling Stone. Apparently the Jews have learned a lot from the Nazis.

And another thing,

THE IRAQ WAR PROVED TO BE HORRIBLE FOR ISRAEL.

Now you want the same neocons in charge to make the same idiotic mistake again???

WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE????????????

word, your evalutaion of the whole situation is a little off

first off, despite what the press may have you believe, the N. Korea situation has nothing to do with N. Korea and the US, and everything to do with the US and China…when China says jump, Pyongjyang says “how high”

We, the Chinese, and N. Koreans have been in serious negotiations, but make no mistake, this was a chinese run show from the get-go…presumably we reached some sort of economic deal behind the scenes with China, in a few months the picture will be much clearer

as for Isreal, i wouldnt worry about them, they seemed to fine in nearly every war they’ve fought in

but it seems the iran thing is just a contingency plan…at this stage, who would think invading Iran is a good idea?

Merk whatever,

If this administration had shown the same kind of diplomatic lean towards Iran they’ve shown towards North Korea, we wouldn’t have Bush beating the war drums and the military leaking plans to attack Iran intended to gin up hostility.

The entire “axis of evil” is cover for a Likudist war against regimes that threaten Israel. The fact that we let North Korea off the hook is another instance of proof.

And you think we disregard our national security vis a vis North Korea just because it suits Chinese interests? Wrong. China gets most of its oil from Iran. When we attack Iran-and we will- Chinese production will take a hit because of lack of oil and the U.S. economy will drop like a bunch of bricks because our economy is dependent on China’s. This is neither good for China nor the U.S. nor the rest of the figgin’ world which is connected to the U.S. economy. It is only good for Israeli national security and horrible for the rest of the world.

All because of a few right wing Jewish and Christian fanatics… This is what happens when you vote for religious fanatics, Cons. I doubt you’ll remember the lesson…

Oh yeah,

“but it seems the iran thing is just a contingency plan…at this stage, who would think invading Iran is a good idea?”

The Jewish Neocons along with the suicide-cult evangelicals. That’s who.

And to be clear: we’re not going to invade Iran. We’re going to bomb them the way Israel bombed Lebanon last summer. And it’s going to fail just like it did last summer.

Again, we have the right wing Jews and the suicide-cult evangelicals to thank.

Manditory prevenitive health care, sounds unconstintutional.

I can’t believe I’m typing these words: The pig is right. The government has no place telling me when and where to go to the doctor’s office, if at all.

My life is my own. I already tolerate more attempts to control my life than the constitution should allow or I should endure. Trust me, you don’t want to add many more grains of sand on this camels back.

If I ever come campaigning in seattle, expect me there with my middle finger extended in your direction.

Just admit it, we have all know that government ‘knows whats best for us’. So ‘just buckle up’ because ‘its the law’. Don’t curse about it because ‘certain words are bad’. If you say them, they may come and kill you in your sleep. Lastly, because its ‘for your own good’, don’t read or watch any dissenting media, it will only upset you.

Oh, those burgers aren’t good for you either so they’ll be taking those.

Remember to thank them for looking out for us. Now say your prayer to the government approved deity and brush your teeth, if you don’t its a 20 dollar fine.

Hey porkchop,

I’d love to argue with you but this site keeps censoring me every time I write about Israel! I wonder why that is…

heh,

and apparently now you get to fear censorship from more people than just the government! Go capitalism!

And if you want to study “Mein Kampf” just go to a Likudist seminar.

And remember: Hitler was half Jewish.

The right wing half

Hey Word what the hell has Israel got to do with John Marx Edwards forcing people to go to the doctor? Nothing.

But before you start with your BS, let me add something. Abortion rights are a big liberal thing. The whole premise is based upon a woman’s right to privacy. It is between her and her doctor. Well seems the same would apply to me having a regular check up, it’s between me and my doctor.

Translation of the dialog between our governments:
US: my penis is huge!
IRAN: MINE IS BIGGER!
US: NUH UH!
IRAN: UH HUH!

In all seriousness, this is a lot of posturing so that they look tough. US wants more control over the middle east and Iran has been its real target for decades. Iran, now under the rule of a religious nut(thanks to the US) is letting his puppet president, Mahmoud, rant and rave because they want more control over the middle east too.

This is one of the rare occasions when the powerful are at odds with each other and not simply oppressing their own respective people.

And porkchop,

Not everything is about you. Read the post we’re “responding to.”

But to answer your question you’ll probably be begging to see a doctor after Bush-after his hero, Hitler- starts another World War and the Russians decide to nuke us.

Word | 9/5/2007, 7:04 pm EST

And porkchop,

Not everything is about you. Read the post we’re “responding to.”

————————– -
Word | 9/4/2007, 8:47 pm EST

Hey porkchop,

I’d love to argue with you but this site keeps censoring me every time I write about Israel! I wonder why that is…
—————————- ——-

Forgot what you typed?

Piglet,

More like what I type goes down the memory hole because this site deletes it.

I answered your question but since my answer had to do with Bush bombing Iran the “moderators” on this site deleted it.

So here’s the answer again: Would you refuse to take someone to the doctor/emergency room if they’d been attacked and didn’t consciously have the choice to go themselves? It sounds like it. How is that relevant to Israel? Because the likelihood of an attack on our soil will skyrocket if this idiot in charge bombs Iran. And he will bomb Iran. Why? To keep Israel safe (even though realistically it will actually place Israel in far greater danger).

To paraphrase, Bush’s starting WW III is far more important than any quibble about the limits of community healthcare. Chances are Bush’s war mongering will PROMOTE universal healthcare because even if Russia doesn’t attack us, after Iran NO ONE will vote Republican. It will destroy the party.

Word – How does anything you have said have anything to do with Edwards making people go to the doctor?

Pig,

1) This thread is NOT just about Edwards.
2) Since when does anyone ‘stay on point?’
3) You of all people can’t say anything about that.
4) I see that when you got ‘pinned down’ on the ‘carbon’ thread, you did the usual Piggy Cut ‘N Run.

Coward

Dennis, I know you would love to think you are getting under my skin, but you are not, so quit wasting your time.

yea dennis, don’t you know he doesn’t have skin? He’s like that Star Trek episode where Kirk is compelled to gladiator fights by disembodied brains. He’s like that but only half a brain. The part with morals, intelligence, creativity and higher intellectual functions has shrunk so much it cannot be identified as such.

DirtyDennis | 9/7/2007, 8:41 am EST

Pig,

1) This thread is NOT just about Edwards.
2) Since when does anyone ‘stay on point?’
3) You of all people can’t say anything about that.
4) I see that when you got ‘pinned down’ on the ‘carbon’ thread, you did the usual Piggy Cut ‘N Run.

Coward
——————–

Let me respond to this point by point.

1) I am well aware of that, but word said

“Hey porkchop,

I’d love to argue with you but this site keeps censoring me every time I write about Israel! I wonder why that is…”

And since the only thing I have commented on is Edwards, for him to argue with me he would have to be addressing Edwards remarks.

2)Never. But that is irrelevant.

3)I will say what I please.

4) you did not pin me down on anything, and I quit responding becuase you and jed began posting long rants that did not relate to what was posted.

Loser.

Bacon Strip:
To paraphrase the punches thrown your way, if I may, the responses to your comments may be off topic, but they’re definitely needed. There’s nothing wrong with trying to refute someone’s pseudo, kool-aid logic. And then, your excuse for not engaging in the debate about what you originally said, you just say “you’re off topic. what’s that got to do with anything?”. But, then again, that’s quite typical of the current group of Bush supporters. Actual debating exposes them as uneducated, empire-building, race oppressing warmongers. It’s kind of like what every Republican senator on the face of the earth, except Hagel, says: “We’re fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here.” They say it, and aren’t held to open debate about it. An open debate would refute ALL of the current foreign policy.
But, the good news is this: I see the slow fall of the Repubelickan party. It’s going to have to have some serious reform now that they’re the party of smut…….

word, what your saying falls into a different category–those who are born disabled, or are disabled through no fault of their own, should be helped

but if you’re healthy, of sound mind, and not brainwashed into to thinking that the government owes you some sort of right to a checkup, then you should not have to be COERCED into to seeing a doctor, presumably at the discrestion of the government

government has no business, much less right, intruding itself in the private affairs of its citizens…but with the caveat that if you screw up, then the governemnt wont bail you out

more personal responsibility, less intrusive nanny government

Merk:
I agree with you wholeheartedly on mandatory visits to the physician. However, I don’t believe the current health system we have in this country can survive another generation. I firmly believe government should be involved when it comes to health. The reason: exams, prescriptions, and surgeries are not things we can do on our own. Transportation, clothing, shelter, and schooling are all things we can and should be able to choose. But, to have a profit-based health system probably DOES actually kill people that can’t afford health insurance. We can have both, private and public health systems, and everybody knows it. I think we need to step away from rhetoric like “it’s their own fault they’re sick.” Or, “get a job and then go to the doctor.” Obviously there’s enough money, or WAS enough money, in our treasury to fund a national health system that doesn’t involve profit-mongering. There’s also enough money in our treasury to fund energy conversion. Anybody who says there isn’t is forgetting the 500 billion we’ve spent in Iraq (200 million daily now) already.

Merkwurdigliebe,

Read the whole thread buddy, and you’ll understand why what I was saying “falls into a different category.”

And I’m not sure if you realize it but what you wrote is basically nuts. I mean, you basically say that if you’re not healthy then you should be “coerced” into seeing a doctor. Well, how the hell is someone other than a doctor going to determine if you’re healthy or not? It makes no sense.

Also, you glibly write that people who believe that the government owes them a right to a checkup need medical attention. Uh… isn’t this giving them exactly what they want? Again, it makes no sense at all.

I mean, I was going to write just for fun that conservatives are basically insane and that that constitutes them being “disabled through no fault of their own,” and that they should receive mandatory medical help because of it. But what you wrote is so hilarious it beats anything I could come up with. I mean, you say government should coerce its citizens into seeing a doctor if they’re not healthy, not of sound mind and brainwashed, yet then you say government has no business intruding itself in the private affairs of its citizens. YOU MAKE NO SENSE AT ALL.

Maybe this would clear things up: exactly WHEN does the government-or anyone else- have a right to COERCE you into seeing a doctor?

Word | 9/7/2007, 7:33 pm EST

I refuted you by pointing out that it is not a liberal thing to help someone by taking them to see a doctor if they’ve been attacked and cannot make the decision to see a doctor themselves.

————————– ——

As Merkwurdigliebe pointed out, helping someone who is not able to make the decision themselves, say they are unconsciencous, is not the same as making someone have regular check ups. So you have disputed nothing.

—————— ———–

Sixinonehand
” And then, your excuse for not engaging in the debate about what you originally said, you just say “you’re off topic. what’s that got to do with anything?”.

I have not tried not engage in debate about what I origially said, you have not posted anything that disputes what I originally said, therefore you have said nothing to debate.

Word | 9/7/2007, 7:33 pm EST

I refuted you by pointing out that it is not a liberal thing to help someone by taking them to see a doctor if they’ve been attacked and cannot make the decision to see a doctor themselves.

——————— —– ——

As Merkwurdigliebe pointed out, helping someone who is not able to make the decision themselves, say they are unconsciencous, is not the same as making someone have regular check ups. So you have disputed nothing.

————- —– ———–

Sixinonehand
” And then, your excuse for not engaging in the debate about what you originally said, you just say “you’re off topic. what’s that got to do with anything?”.

I have not tried not engage in debate about what I origially said, you have not posted anything that disputes what I originally said, therefore you have said nothing to debate.

Piglet:
What the hell do you mean I haven’t refuted anything you’ve said???
Pig: “liberal want to tell people what they can drive, what they can eat…”
You are wrong there and have been refuted, but refuse to admit the rebuttal. That statement, in quotes, is absolutely false. But, if you think I “have not posted anything that disputes what I originally said…”, then that’s your problem.
But, again, denial is another trait of the republican party.
It’s simply amazing how many people still think that government shouldn’t be telling us what to do. Do you people, seriously, want to live in an unpoliced state? Industry and marketplace are not good leaders. But, yet, some people think they should be making the decisions for us. So, if that’s the case, Merk, Piggy, and others, then what situation is government good for? Why even have a government? Why not just have local militias? Why not just divide the country into sectarian militias? Oh wait, that’s being done somewhere else, and not very well. Government is a necessary evil. Just like parents are a necessary evil.
So, again, what is your answer to no government, Merk?

Sixinonehand | 9/9/2007, 11:48 am EST

Piglet:
What the hell do you mean I haven’t refuted anything you’ve said???
Pig: “liberal want to tell people what they can drive, what they can eat…”
You are wrong there and have been refuted, but refuse to admit the rebuttal. That statement, in quotes, is absolutely false. But, if you think I “have not posted anything that disputes what I originally said…”, then that’s your problem.
But, again, denial is another trait of the republican party.

——————– —-

It is liberals who have banned trans fats, that would telling people what they can eat. It is liberals who are trying to ban SUV’s in the name of global warming, that would be telling people what to drive. And no one said there should be no government. The role of the government is defined in the Constitution, there are certain things the government is responsible for, defense against foriegn enemies, protection against crime, but it is not the role of government to take care of your every problem.

Pig

Doesn’t constant lying wear you out?

The liberal government does NOT tell you what to eat. They tell food manufacturers what they can put into foods. Trans fats are man made, not required by the body, not beneficial in any way and, in fact, increase the risk of heart disease. No different than adding mercury or lead to the food.

The liberal government does NOT tell you what kind of car you can drive. Some years back, the Detroit lobbyists got Congress to excempt certain pick-ups (not the imported kind) from the fuel economy restrictions being legislated. The ‘argument’ was to give a ‘break’ to the farmers. Right. If they wanted to ‘help’ the farmers, they could have manufactured economical pick-ups. The SUV frame is actually that of a pick-up and is, therefore, exempt for the fuel economy requirements of other automobiles. Farmers don’t use SUVs so the argument doesn’t stick and ‘the government’ wants the auto makers to bring the SUV fuel economy in line with the rest of the industry.

and once again he has succeded in turning the conversation from the topic at hand into a conversation about him. regardless of how moronic he may seem in his posts, you have to realize he is a master at his craft. Obfuscation, dissembling, sewing the seeds of doubt and discord. This guy is evidently a tool of earth’s oldest, most dangerous nemesis without really realizing it, which is the way it works best, in darkness and anonymity.

Merkwurdigliebe | 9/9/2007, 11:30 am EST
“i said if you WERE HEALTHY, or even not healty, than there is no reason that the government, or anybody else, should force you to go to a doctor”

Merkwurdigliebe | 9/8/2007, 12:11 am EST
“but if you’re healthy, of sound mind, and not brainwashed into to thinking that the government owes you some sort of right to a checkup, then you should not have to be COERCED into to seeing a doctor”

Do you enjoy lying? Or am I “misreading” your post again? Am I alone in thinking it is absolutely hilarious that someone who tells me to “go back to the kiddie pool” uses a moniker that is basically the written equivalent of a child’s sputter-up?

Merkwhatever and Roasted Pork,

The inherent Catch-22 in your childish argument is this: according to Merkwhatever, “those who are born disabled, or are disabled through no fault of their own, should be helped.” Well, genius: HOW IS THE GOVERNMENT GOING TO KNOW WHETHER SOMEONE IS DISABLED “THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN” WITHOUT PERFORMING CHECKUPS ON THEM?

You can wade into the adult’s section when you answer that one.

Merkwurklurkkwerkmarkyormndswb ie(?): Sorry bout that Merk. I had a moment….
Anyway, above and beyond the main event that’s going on, I agree with you. I also agree that it’s not the government’s job to TELL you that you have to have that child. There’s an instance where I’d like to hear your thoughts on government interference.

i honestly dont know why one would want to intrust their health to the govt anyway…they can barely handle the issuing of passports, or facilitate you at the DMV, and you want to hand over health to these people

maybe theres a compromise somewhere

jed and dennis, you both make an excellent point…i think the problem lies not in health per se, but in education

im not so sure more money is the solution, tremendous amounts of have been spent since the “Great Society” era and we’re still churning out dullards at a dime a dozen

perhaps a restructuring of the system along Japanese or European models?